Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:08, 19 December 2022

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article. British crime (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. England Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Enforcement Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. London Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination. Discussions: RM, Murder of Don Banfield → Disappearance of Don Banfield, No consensus, 24 November 2022, move discussion

h79.67.113.83 (talk) 09:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

79.67.113.83, if you vandalise the article again you will get blocked. Legal threats such as this: will also get you blocked. Stop now unless you want your access to Misplaced Pages revoked from your address (which, by the way, all editors can see). Classic Middlesex (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Verifying references

@Classic Middlesex: Can you lay your hands on a copy (or a web access) of the Times article referenced at Cite 16 in the article? I can't access it: Fiona Hamilton, "Justice catches up with murderous wife and daughter", 4 April 2012, page 15. I'd like to verify the statement used in the article cited to The Times. Cheers! Geoff | 18:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

@Classic Middlesex: Never mind. We have access to the Dale Times Archive via Misplaced Pages Libary and so I was able to retrieve and review the article. Geoff | 14:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

Oh yes sorry, I am terrible at remembering notifications once I've already clicked off them. Classic Middlesex (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

"Shirley Banfield (criminal)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Shirley Banfield (criminal) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 November 17#Shirley Banfield (criminal) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:17, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shirley Banfield (cricketer) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 24 November 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. —usernamekiran (talk) 15:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Murder of Don Banfield → Disappearance of Don Banfield – While there was a murder conviction, the conviction was quashed, and I'm not really sure that this is wise to keep framed as a murder from a WP:BLP perspective. There were certainly suspicious circumstances surrounding his death, including the two people initially convicted of murder admitting to fraud that's related to the disappearance and the lawyer admitting that it was likely that either Shirley or Lynette killed Don, but I don't like the phrase "murder" absent a valid conviction. WP:COMMONNAME might go against this (and is reasonable, given that this is how it was widely covered), but I think that the WP:CRITERIA (namely precision) would support this move. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 14:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Shibbolethink 14:40, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Disclaimer, I am very much on the "let common name win" side of the crime naming policy by default, and I presume the incident is still referred to as a "murder" even post-conviction quashing. More generally, "is there an active conviction y/n" is not the only question to me - we should look at why the conviction was quashed. It was not quashed because evidence surfaced that Banfield was actually alive, but rather question over whether the highly controversial "joint enterprise" style conviction was valid. Nobody thinks there's any chance Banfield is actually alive (I'm sure he's been declared legally dead) so my very very very distant second choice would be Death of Don Bansfield if there's truly a desire to avoid the term "Murder", but I think "murder" is fine on common name basis regardless. SnowFire (talk) 21:14, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

  @SnowFire:, given that there is a difference between murder and killing, would you be OK moving this to "Killing of Don Banfield"? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 21:17, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

  I don't have a strong opinion about "Death of" vs. "Killing of", they seem about the same in this particular case. SnowFire (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

• Support - we don't generally call something a murder if there's no extant conviction, and I think this is probably a BLP issue too, given that the individual initially convicted of murder was later quashed. Probably best to call it a disappearance rather than a killing too, since in theory he might not even be dead.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:06, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Per above, I think it's important to consider the reason that the conviction was quashed. The prosecution essentially said "one of these two people did it, or maybe both of them, but we're not sure about the details, so let's throw them both in prison." The jury agreed that this was accurate and convicted. The appeals court (correctly) said this wasn't good enough, that the prosecution's case needed to make sure that an innocent person wasn't being imprisoned as well merely because they might have done it (and definitely collaborated on the fraud afterward). But that doesn't overturn the basic facts of the case, which are that Don Banfield was murdered, and a jury agreed with that, and doubt on that aspect wasn't the reason the conviction was quashed, but rather the whole "joint enterprise" theory of not having to work out the details. Also, if we're being very strict about hewing to the legal definition of "murder", that implies we might want to be strict about the legal definition of "death" too which can include being declared dead (and thus not "disappeared"). I don't think we should do either of those, but just throwing that out there as a thought. SnowFire (talk) 21:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The appeal court's accepted that he's dead and was murdered. I've looked for an inquest – sometimes re-opened after an acquittal – but found no sign that one was re-opened after the quashing. The appeal judgment seems to be quoted in full here; that does match the extracts in news reports. That doesn't reconsider whether or not he's dead and was murdered. Towards the end, it lists "five postulations as to what might have explained the death, lucidly set out by" the appellants' QC that one or both killed him; by that point "the death" is not in question and the appellants' QC has "accepted that the likelihood is that one or other appellant murdered DB". NebY (talk) 16:25, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography has been notified of this discussion. — Shibbolethink 14:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject London has been notified of this discussion. — Shibbolethink 14:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: to generate a more thorough consensus — Shibbolethink 14:40, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• C-Class biography articles
• Misplaced Pages requested photographs of people
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class Crime-related articles
• Low-importance Crime-related articles
• WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
• C-Class England-related articles
• Low-importance England-related articles
• WikiProject England pages
• C-Class law articles
• Low-importance law articles
• WikiProject Law articles
• C-Class Law enforcement articles
• Low-importance Law enforcement articles
• WikiProject Law Enforcement articles
• C-Class London-related articles
• Low-importance London-related articles